1

Ensuring travel broadens minds: a suitable case for Learning Design?

Catherine O’Sullivan MA MSc EdD FRSM

Terence O’Sullivan MA MSc PhD SFHEA

O’Sullivan (2018, p. 283) advocates ‘an ability to continue to learn, both from your own

experience and from the good practice of others’ as a strategy for professional development

in cultural organisations, using a case study of international exchange visits. Yet in spite of

their popularity, there is little systematic evaluation of such exchanges. The lack of an

evidence base for improving practice in cultural and educational exchange visits threatens

their continued justification in a resource-constrained environment. It threatens to leave

barriers to participation intact through lack of analysis (Gastinger, 2011; O’Sullivan and

Flecknoe, 2000), and perpetuates the danger of transferring inappropriate educational

paradigms and cultural ideologies through unexamined practices (Cramp, 2016: Fallon and

Paquette, 2015; Maranzan et al, 2013; Martin and Griffiths, 2012). On the other hand,

evidence-based improvements in the effectiveness of cultural and educational exchanges

would strengthen the case for widening participation (MacInnes et al, 2019) and increase

their value to international educational development (British Council, 2018). As a learning

tool, international exchange visits should be amenable to the same quality enhancement

processes used for other educational materials. The UK Open University has embraced

Learning Design (Cross, et al., 2012) as a methodology for the design and continuous

improvement of its courses. Learning Design theory analyses courses into generic activities

centred on learner needs and experience. Designs can be tested, reused and refined as

appropriate in the light of evidence from learning analytics (Rientes and Toetenel, 2016;

O’Sullivan and O’Sullivan, 2018). Drawing on literature and case studies, we propose that

2

applying the principles of Learning Design to planning exchange visits will help prevent some

of the identified practical and ideological problems. Furthermore, we argue that

incorporating elements of distance learning around the exchange visit will improve and

enrich the value of this kind of professional development.

Introduction

International exchange visits, and other forms of mobility between countries, have been a

common feature of programmes designed to promote professional development in the

higher education and cultural sectors. In a highly interconnected world facing challenges

and opportunities that can only be addressed effectively through international responses,

there is a high perceived value to providing learners and professionals with the means to

broaden their minds and understandings. Spending a limited amount of time in a different

country and culture appears to offer an accelerated route to knowledge transfer and skills

development. This is because the combination of formal and informal learning, married to

comparative professional experience, offers a unique opportunity to interrogate personal

knowledge and develop cultural competence in a new environment. Prominent examples of

frameworks within which international mobility takes place include the EU’s ERASMUS

programme (promoting European student mobility for study and work experience amongst

participating institutions and organisations), and the US Government’s Fulbright program,

which funds exchanges between America and over 160 countries involving ‘ students,

scholars, artists, teachers, and professionals of all background’ (ECA, n.d ; European Council,

2017). Alongside major schemes like these, individual professional bodies and Higher

Education Institutions may offer their own mobility initiatives, as well as working with

international agencies and large corporations. Sometimes such schemes attract

3

considerable prestige for participants. For example, the competitive Daiwa Anglo-Japanese

Foundation scholarship offers a limited number of elite UK graduates the chance to spend

almost two years immersed in Japan, learning its language and professional and cultural

norms (Daiwa Foundation, 2019).

Alongside such elite schemes between developed economies, many mobility initiatives aim

to address international inequalities by capacity-building through the transfer of know-how

and good practice from a more developed economy to a less developed economy. Mobility

under the auspices of the Global Business Schools Network is a case in point (GBSN, n.d.).

Learning from each other in an international community of practice is a powerful means of

improving standards for all members. But in order to do this effectively, particularly when it

comes to leadership development in education and the creative industries, we need to be

sensitive to the causes of inequality between economies, not just our immediate experience

of them.

We chose to feature one such scheme as a case study in our recent book Creative Arts

Marketing, the ACCELERATE leadership development programme run jointly by the Australia

Council for the Arts and the British Council (Hill, et al, 2018). From its inauguration in 2009

to its final presentation in 2016, ACCELERATE facilitated professional placements in UK arts

organisations of arts leaders from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island communities

(British Council, 2019). ACCELERATE epitomises the benefits of mobility schemes, as well as

some of their potential challenges (and creative ways of addressing them) to which we will

return in this paper. ACCELERATE alumni have called it ‘transformational’ and ‘life-

changing’, evaluating their international experience not just as an opportunity to meet and

share practice with other professionals and organisations across borders, but to reflect on

4

their own growth and creative trajectory away from the pressures of their everyday

professional context (Carty, 2017).

Ideological and practical barriers to successful Study Visits

Living, working and learning in an unfamiliar geographical and cultural context, away from

‘business as usual’, appears central to the value of mobility programmes. However, the

perceived benefits of programmes like this often underestimate the issues raised for

participants (Doyle et al 2010). These impediments to learning can be grouped into four

headings: financial and accommodation, context, states of mind and course organisation

(O’Sullivan and Flecknoe 2000). While the idea of international exchange is attractive and

stimulating, practical and cultural barriers need to be anticipated and actively managed to

maximise the likelihood of success at both an individual and a programme level.

Rapid developments in the technology and application of online learning, and the

opportunities this creates for distance learning, invite the question of whether mobility

could be achieved virtually rather than involving physical relocation – thus minimising

disruption, cost and other barriers to participants. Virtual mobility (de Gruyter et al., 2011)

is already a feature of the way that many distance learning providers, including the Open

University, operate schemes such as ERASMUS. But, as we shall argue, while online and

distance learning (ODL) has a crucial part to play in mobility, it is best regarded as

complementing rather than substituting for physical mobility. A participant on the

ACCELERATE programme articulated this, arguing:

“I couldn’t believe the generosity of the people we met in terms of sharing their expertise

and knowledge...There was little discourse about cultural leadership in Australia – in the UK,

it was front and centre – not just the work – which was new to me. After going there, I

5

thought, ‘Our work is in Australia, that’s where we need to connect and build relationships’

– but it was the eye-opening aspect of seeing so many different creative models.” (Carty

2017, p. 18)

At the same time, in spite of its potential richness as a learning experience, mobility cannot

be justified for its own sake. As O’Sullivan and Flecknoe (2000) argue, it needs to serve

intended learning outcomes like any other element of a programme of learning. As we will

argue later in the paper, a thorough process of learning design, involving the selection of the

most appropriate tools, is essential in conceiving and implementing international mobility as

a form of educational provision.

Careful design cannot rule out potential problems, but by forcing the consideration of such

problems at an early stage in planning, it can make them easier to mitigate. While

systematic evaluation of mobility programmes is relatively rare, the academic research

literature draws attention to a range of potential pitfalls which can prevent successful

outcomes. These pitfalls can be broadly grouped into practical considerations (such as the

four groups of issues listed earlier from O’Sullivan and Flecknoe (2000)), and what might be

termed ideological considerations. Both can have a detrimental effect on the experience of

participants and the effectiveness of the learning experience.

Looking first at ideological considerations, mobility schemes need to acknowledge the

sometimes difficult international and intercultural relations that frame professional practice.

Martin and Griffiths (2012) argue that neo-liberal global education policy can find

expression in North-South study visits in ways that run counter to their intended effects.

Critics of neo-liberalism argue that it reframes education from being a public good to being

a source of private advantage (Peters, 2012). The neo-liberal view of history stresses the

6

advance of globalisation and technological progress, merging the world into one all-

encompassing market. In this analysis, international mobility in education and training

would seem to be a highly appropriate adaptive strategy. But Martin and Griffiths argue its

use in teacher education leaves historical issues of power and representation insufficiently

explored. ‘[S]tudy visits’, they write, ‘provide experience of another country and culture

[but] they do not, de facto, challenge teachers’ worldviews for two key reasons. Firstly,

study visits are often not facilitated by differently knowledgeable others, so participants’

implicit (neo-liberal) worldviews are left unchallenged, acting as filters to their experiences.

Secondly, without facilitation, participants’ attention is naturally drawn to the most obvious

difference, that of inequality in the world today, without necessarily understanding the

influence of the past, (that is, the former colonial relationship between the UK and Southern

countries), which potentially denies an understanding of how that inequality came about.’

(Martin and Griffiths, 2012, pp. 907 – 8). What goes for teacher exchanges in this criticism

might well apply to other exchange visits.

Martin and Griffiths’ solution to the ideological problem they identify starts with a pre-visit

stage, exploring taken-for-granted assumptions about relations between the North and

South, followed by study visits which are facilitated by ‘knowledgeable others’ with whom

culture and identity can be explored honestly and constructively.

Fallon and Paquette (2015) and Maranzan et al. (2013) strike a similar note of caution when

writing about leadership development programmes addressing culturally-specific

populations of learners (in their cases Canadian First Nations educational and community

leaders). They warn, respectively, against the unconscious application of Western

educational paradigms (prioritising technology and consumerism); and not taking into

7

account culturally-derived barriers to participation by women (such as family and home

responsibility, community pressure, and lack of support). The mention of domestic

responsibilities in Maranzan et al.’s list reveals the close intersection between ideology and

practical barriers, at least as they apply to women participants.

Feedback from ACCELERATE participants illustrated that the programme underplayed the

history of the UK in Australia, including British appropriation of First Nations artefacts, and

that host organisations need to be educated about the history and context which led to the

visits (Carty 2017, p. 26). Some participants questioned the appropriateness of the British

Council in leading the programme (Carty 2017, p. 37). Interestingly too, the initial

programme failed to understand programme participants’ own understandings, and the

meanings they would attach, to their potential identity as cultural leaders:

“But I never saw that as leadership. Leadership in the Noongar world is about elders. You

have to earn that...I would never have called myself a leader.” (Carty 2017, p.21).

In terms of practical challenges, the ACCELERATE alumni encountered a range of practical

and pastoral issues that had to be addressed in the first few iterations of the programme

(Carty 2017, p. 58). These confirmed earlier findings (Flecknoe and O’Sullivan 1997,

O’Sullivan and Flecknoe 2000). Following their work with cohorts of Indonesian and

Grenadian professionals who visited Leeds in 1996/7, the latter authors proposed the

following test for funders and programme developers in relation to proposed study visits:

“IF participants need to come to the UK…this should be for as short a period as is consonant

with the aims of the programme and after an in-country preparation which minimises

cultural dissonance and maximises personal motivation. The element of any programme

which does not require comparative study should be made by block intervention in the

8

domestic environment” (O’Sullivan and Flecknoe 2000, p. 84). The authors go on to

recommend continuity in personal tutoring, peer support and creating sustainability after

the programme, shorter visits, host organisations’ understandings of their visitors’ context,

the use of digital technologies, and planning for sustainability. These features of a study visit

can be deployed as a strategy to mitigate some of the impact of both ideological and

practical concerns on participants.

The ideological and practical issues that surfaced in the ACCELERATE programme required

the programme to undergo considerable transformation and development between 2009

and 2016, demonstrating to us that more thought and analysis needs to be given to

programme design at an earlier stage than may usually be the case. In practical terms, as

the programme developed, greater care was taken with logistical and day-to-day support.

Mentors for the participants while on their visit were added following feedback from the

earlier cohorts, and seen as a significant added resource. There were issues about the

sequencing and timing of elements of the programme, most notably culturally-focused

support and the purpose and positioning of the action learning sets (Carty, 2017, p. 68). The

fact that the ACCELERATE programme continued to be substantially revised through out its

life is evidence both of the care with which the designers of that programme attended to

participant feedback, but also of the need for a wider general understanding of how to

design study visits more effectively from the outset. Carty (2017, p. 38) notes that there is a

serious issue around knowledge transfer from ACCELERATE with, perhaps, even the

sponsoring organisations failing to recognise the valuable transferable learning from the

programme:

9

“…it is notable that this beacon cultural leadership programme does not appear to be

championed by (or demonstrate significant traction with) the arts, creative industries or

cultural skills teams.” (Carty 2017, p.38).

Given that there is a recognised need for more robust sharing of best practice in relation to

study visits, and the need for further research into what works (Gastinger, 2011; O’Sullivan

and Flecknoe, 2000), it is regrettable that empirical evidence from such programmes is not

disseminated more widely.

In summary, as we have seen, the barriers to effective participation in international mobility

are complex and interwoven. While we have divided them into ideological and practical

categories in this brief review of extant research, they interact and reinforce one another –

for example lack of money makes it more difficult to resolve accommodation problems, and

inflexible organisational arrangements can increase the sense of alienation felt by some

participants. Furthermore, the hidden filters of ideology and history can exclude potentially

enlightening avenues of interpretation and analysis, and deprive participants of the deep

and transformative experience that they might otherwise have enjoyed.

Improving the impact of study visits

All the recommendations made by authors cited so far in this paper for improving

international exchange and mobility programmes share a common theme. They all address

the matter of design. In other words, they suggest changes to activities, and the sequencing

of activities, which will enhance or improve the learning experience available to

participants. Understanding how such activities combine to create a learning experience is

essential to creating effective programmes. For example, Cramp (2016), writing about a

school leadership development programme, explicitly addresses the activities carried out by

10

participants in their visits, particularly ‘learning walks’ – staff or student-led tours of the

schools visited by a group of participants. The walks themselves were an opportunity to

absorb information about a school and its operations, but were followed by reflective

discussions where participants developed an understanding of the walks themselves as

expressions of a particular school’s priorities and values. Such analysis led to further

reflections on the role and meaning of learning walks in the participants’ home context.

Thus the value of one activity was complemented and enhanced by its sequential

relationship with another.

One lesson from this experience is that it is important to limit the amount of assimilation of

knowledge in a programme to allow time for subsequent reflection. The temptation, in a

limited period of mobility, might have been to cram in as much assimilation as possible –

thus crowding out the opportunity to process it and critique what has been learned. By

incorporating reflective sessions where the group shared and discussed their insights, the

design of the programme led to a much richer and productive experience. Standing back

from the immediate experience of the study visit and seeing it as a sequence of activities,

whose duration and ordering have material effects on the quality of what is learned, allows

the adoption of a design perspective. Learning Design (Cross, et al., 2012) advocates the

value of such a perspective – and gives guidelines on how it can be applied prospectively

rather than retrospectively, to enhance the value of mobility experiences.

Interestingly, Cramp (2016) also draws attention to the importance of informal learning

taking place in the interstices between more formally designed activities. The chance

conversations between colleagues outside of formal settings, the surprising encounter with

an idea or an unplanned event, are always going to be an important part of an effective

11

learning experience. But while such serendipity cannot be designed into any programme,

formal approaches to what can be designed may well create more opportunities for the

unexpected by helping avoid an unbalanced or overcrowded schedule of activities.

In the rest of this paper, we will argue that a closer attention to the learning design of the

visit will reap benefits in terms of both the immediate experience and the development of

deep and transferable learning. We will argue that pre-preparation prior to the visit should

encourage a strong cohort experience; to support the student while they are away and

encourage sustainability after the programme. Furthermore, learning about reflection will

give students the ability to record the experience as it happens and then to interrogate it in

different ways after it is over. Finally, in terms of pre-preparation, we suggest that helping

the students clarify their own learning needs will enable deeper learning.

One of the participants in ACCELERATE explained:

“I think as indigenous people, we grapple with thinking of ourselves as leaders in our own

communities, and the different set of responsibilities it entails. Some segment that

acknowledges and explores that at the beginning would be useful, because many of us had

to get beyond that before we could really take on the lessons that were on offer (Carty

2017, p.68)

At the same time, parallel preparations need to be made in the host country to ensure those

receiving the participants are in the best place to support their learning. Willing though

host organisations may be to welcome international visitors, it cannot be assumed that they

will necessarily have the cultural competence and contextual understanding to offer an

optimum experience without some pre-work on their part. Host preparation about the

programme, the participants and the context from which they are coming can prevent

12

awkward misunderstandings. Carty cites, for example, inappropriate comparisons being

drawn between what cultural diversity means to UK organisations with the experiences of

the First Nations in former colonies.

During the visits, which may potentially be overwhelming for individuals, we suggest the

main activity is to observe and to record; with reflection and exploration an activity towards

the end of the time to check understandings and triangulate new insights. Upon their

return, participants need to be supported through short term action planning; and then a

longer period of varied activities which enable continued learning and knowledge transfer.

Using digital technologies to enhance Study Visits

All of these recommendations for enhancing the value of mobility are relevant to the

application of Open and Distance Learning tools and resources as part of a programme. For

example, depending on their professional backgrounds, students might be more or less

familiar with the planning and objective-setting techniques which would make their pre-

preparation stage more effective. Exposure to an Open Educational Resource (OER) such as

the free OpenLearn course ‘Planning a Project’ would provide generic support for

participants intent on clarifying their needs and how they might be satisfied within a study

visit (Open University, 2016b). Derived from material originally presented as part of the

Open University Business School MBA, ‘Planning a Project’ is now available under a Creative

Commons licence in several formats. Users can select and customise content relevant to

their requirements.

As to the processes of observation and reflection, smartphones or tablets using widely

available free blogging tools offer a convenient way to collect and keep text, images, and

audio-visual material in one place for later review and reflective analysis. Blogs can be

13

shared within a group of participants if required, allowing reflection to take place in a social

context as endorsed by Raelin (2002) for triangulation of insights.

The practical and theoretical underpinnings of reflection are available in another free

OpenLearn course, ‘Learning to Teach: Becoming a Reflective Practitioner’, written primarily

for teachers but readily adaptable to other professionals and available on the same licensing

terms as the project planning material (Open University, 2016a).

Developing a sense of cohort is facilitated by face-to-face contact, but can be enhanced and

sustained by online support – particularly through free video conferencing apps such as

Skype and Google Hangouts. Using these and other asynchronous communication tools such

as WhatsApp or Facebook groups, cohorts can keep in touch before, during and, crucially,

after the period of mobility in order to boost knowledge transfer and application.

Integrating such open and distance learning tools into the design of physical mobility

activities can help meet the ambitions of emerging economies. Properly used, they should

reduce costs and increase the speed with which participants can implement what they

learn. This is important in the context of capacity building in education and the cultural

industries. For example, if sub-Saharan Africa is to reap the ‘demographic dividend’ of a

young highly-educated population, it needs to expand its post-school provision rapidly over

the next 30 years as the number of 20 – 24 year-olds doubles from its present 90 million

(The Economist, 2019). Similarly, African cultural and creative sectors, whose potential

economic and social value has attracted considerable policy interest across the continent

since the turn of the 21st century (De Beukelaer, 2016), urgently need to find sustainable

business models for a globalising economy. International exchange, supported by online

14

tools, can be an important part of the solution to both challenges, if appropriately conceived

and planned.

Learning Design theory and Study Visits

There is now an influential school of thought which advocates making the process by which

we design courses and qualifications, or any other kind of learning experience, more

rigorous, objective and subject to evidence-based improvement. The advantages of doing so

include the ability to share and reuse what appear to be successful designs, and improve

existing learning experiences by trying different combinations of design elements in the light

of feedback and evidence.

Learning Design takes this sense of ‘what works’ a stage further. It is defined by Conole

(2012: 121) as ‘a methodology for enabling teachers/designers to make more informed

decisions in how they go about designing learning activities and interventions, which is

pedagogically informed and makes effective use of appropriate resources and

technologies”. Part of the spur to Learning Design’s development has been the rapid growth

of online learning, and the extensive data about learner behaviour which has come in its

wake. But the principles of Learning Design are applicable to learning in any mode, including

international exchange and mobility programmes.

The radical innovation of Learning Design is not the technology or use of data it implies, but

the fundamental way it centres on learner needs and their experience. This tends to run

counter to the traditional concerns of universities and academics which are about

transferring knowledge in more abstract terms. It is however absolutely appropriate for the

kinds of mobility programme we have been discussing in this paper. The evidence points to

the need for programme designers to address the context and needs of the learner first

15

(including cultural and ideological issues), and then building the learning experience around

them, paying attention to the content and sequencing of the activities which result. Placing

the learner at the centre of the design process ensures the most effective combination of

activities and resources to achieve appropriate outcomes for that individual, and the best

value-for-money for programme funders.

Learning Design encourages educators to think realistically and relevantly about the needs

and capacities of their target learners at the very inception of each new piece of learning.

The variety of Learning Design practiced at the UK Open University is based on the Open

University Learning Design Initiative (OULDI) developed over a five year project in

collaboration with a number of other higher education providers (Cross, et al., 2012).

An important part of the process involves devising detailed learner personas for new

courses based on a mixture of intuition and research data. In this respect, anyone planning

an episode of learning based on international exchange and mobility is at an advantage.

Instead of creating imaginary students from desk research and intuition, they are likely to

have concrete information about real or potential candidates, including motivation for

participation, expectations from the experience, educational and professional background,

cultural setting, and demographic characteristics. Considering actual or potential

participants at the outset of a design process helps educators create learning experiences

for real students who are faced with a variety of individual barriers and incentives to

success.

Another powerful technique for concentrating the mind towards producing relevant

learning experiences is OULDI’s typology of learning activities. As one would expect, any

new piece of learning material is developed to realise a set of predefined learning

16

outcomes. In the spirit of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1999), all the content and activities

envisaged for the learning material should clearly support (or ‘align’ to) these learning

outcomes. The OULDI process invites designers to consider what mix of activities is most

likely to achieve the outcomes in question. A typology of seven possible learning activities is

provided as detailed in the following table:

Activity type Explanation Typical activity prompts

Assimilative Take in information Read, Watch, Listen…

Finding and handling

information

Search for and use

information

List, Analyze, Collate,

Plot, Find, Gather...

Communicative Discuss course content

with at least one other

person (student or tutor)

Communicate, Debate,

Discuss, Argue…

Productive Actively make something Create, Build, Make,

Design…

Experiential Apply learning in a real-

world setting

Practise, Apply, Explore,

Investigate,..

Interactive/adaptive Apply learning in a

simulated setting

Explore, Experiment,

Trial, Improve, Model,

Simulate.

Assessment All forms of assessment

(summative, formative

and self-assessment)

Write, Present, Report,

Demonstrate, Critique.

TABLE 1. OULDI LEARNING ACTIVITY TYPOLOGY

Source: Adapted from Rienties and Toetenel, 2016

17

On the face of it some of these categories appear to overlap. An activity carried out by a

study visit participant, for example a piece of writing, might fall under a number of

headings. Writing could count as communicative, productive or assessment depending on

whether it was, respectively, an online forum post discussing an aspect of the visit, a set of

notes for personal use, or even part of an assignment which might be graded (summative) in

certain contexts. The benefit for designers is to help them think rigorously how any specific

activity supports the intended learning outcomes of the programme.

Toetenel and Rienties (2016: 982) point out that Learning Design can be applied ‘at activity,

course or qualification level’. It is therefore extendable to the design of programmes of

learning using international exchange or other mobility. As we have already observed, the

typology of activities on which Learning Design is based offers diverse educators a common

language, through which they can make their design intentions explicit, share them with

others, and refine them over time. This offers the opportunity to learn from their own and

others’ experience in a more systematic way than has been hitherto possible. The prospect

of creating international exchanges and mobility activities which are more effective and

offer better value-for-money is a positive development.

Applying Learning Design

When planning for an international exchange scheme or mobility programme, the challenge

for the designer is to determine an appropriate distribution of finite learning time between

the activities necessary to achieve the intended learning outcomes. How might the seven

types translate into the experiences available to someone undertaking mobility in the

18

education or cultural sector? Table 2 offers some suggestions, covering the pre-visit, on visit

and post-visit phases:

Activity type Explanation Potential examples re

visit to UK

Assimilative Take in information Watch videos pre-visit to

learn about UK

Meet UK colleagues in the

field and listen to their

experiences

Finding and handling

information

Search for and use

information

Research potential in-country

hosts and collaborators in

advance

Visit UK centres of excellence

and analyse contextual data

Communicative Discuss course content

with at least one other

person (student or

tutor)

Email other participants prior

to departure to build

relationships

On visit hold reflective

conversations with mentors

Post-visit online dialogue with

former hosts

Productive Actively make

something

Collaborative work with in-

country host using unfamiliar

processes e.g. for textile

production

Organise post-visit

conference to disseminate

learning to local practitioners

Experiential Apply learning in a real-

world setting

Practise new techniques with

the host in situ

Plan career progression using

insights from facilitated

workshops

19

Interactive/adaptive Apply learning in a

simulated setting

Shadow activities in host

organisations

Experiment with new

techniques on return with

others in workshops

Assessment All forms of assessment

(summative, formative

and self-assessment)

Be interviewed for a place on

the programme

Present post visit to funders.

Self-assess the sustainability

of the learning after return

TABLE 2. TRANSLATING OULDI ACTIVITY TYPOLOGY INTO LEARNING

ACTIVITIES FOR AN IMAGINED VISIT TO UK

Source: Adapted from Rienties and Toetenel, 2016

Table 2 presents a selection of activities translated into the kinds of experiences participants

will have had over the programme. By thinking carefully about what activities participants

need, and when they need them, the designers can ensure the best use of different

resources. For example, orientation days before leaving for the UK can concentrate on

more culturally sensitive material, while online resources can deliver factual information.

Mentors can be used to help with individual planning before the visit and benefits

realisation after; while they may be useful during the visit to provide pastoral support and to

act as a critical friend for reflection.

While we might expect all of these activities to be included in any mobility programme, the

Learning Design process ensures they are considered and justified, rather than taken for

granted, or included unnecessarily. More importantly, conscious decisions about their

relative importance to the learning outcomes (and thus the proportion of the available time

they might occupy) can also be taken.

20

There is no compulsion to include all seven types of activity in any one piece of learning – in

fact the principle of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1999) should encourage the use of only

what is necessary. To concentrate the mind, Learning Design workshops at the Open

University require participants to create and agree on a bar chart showing the seven

activities expressed as columns whose height represents the percentage of time they

occupy, treating the whole learning event as 100%. This is then used as a guide to planning,

for example the week by week unfolding of a module, with an appropriate sequencing of

activities to ensure a consistent workload over time; avoiding the peaks and troughs that

might throw learners into crisis as they struggle to balance their studies with the other

demands on their time.

One positive effect of this approach is to bring home to educators how relatively little time

they have at their disposal. It helps avoid the temptation to overload learners with more

work than is feasible in the time available. Programme planners may be tempted to

maximise the amount of assimilative activities at the expense of communicative and

productive activities that internalise and consolidate the skills and knowledge acquired.

Learning Design helps prevent this kind of content overload, allowing learners to access

deeper and more transformative experiences, as we have seen in the example from Cramp

(2016) of an assimilative activity (learning walk) sequenced with the communicative and

productive activities of discussion and reflection. Given the potential for overload during

the actual visit, and the volume of material that is likely to need assimilation, a careful

balance of learning activities during the period of the visit is necessary to manage the

experience. Productive, experiential and interactive/adaptive activities can be particularly

effective once the visitor has returned home and can utilise or experiment in their own

context with what they have assimilated elsewhere.

21

A further advantage of Learning Design is that it facilitates the documentation, sharing and

evaluation of programmes of learning. Despite their potential richness as learning

experiences, the general thinness of an evidence base for improving practice in cultural and

educational mobility schemes may hamper their continued justification in a resource-

constrained educational economy.

ACCELERATE, as we have seen, is an exception to this rule – demonstrating how periodic

evaluations led to change and improvement in the programme. Ironically, a change in

Australian government policy following the elections of 2016 led to the programme being

abandoned due to significant cuts in funding. Despite all the work of the developers, it may

be that the programme in its present form has come to an end. Whether or not the wider

world will ever find out about the deeper legacy, as the programme participants lead the

Aboriginal and Torres Straits artists’ cultural development over the next thirty years,

remains to be seen. By including it as a case study in our book, Creative Arts Marketing (Hill

et al 2018), and focusing on the ACCELERATE programme as an example of good practice in

this paper, we hope to have helped share its learning on effective study visits abroad more

widely.

In conclusion, although Learning Design theory was not used explicitly in this particular

programme, its use could potentially have reduced the need to keep revisiting programme

design. Furthermore, the existence of an articulated and documented programme plan

would have facilitated learning beyond the cultural sector interested in First Nations

leadership. Given the concern of funders to ensure value for money in terms of the impact

achieved by such programmes, stimulating discussion of a design methodology that

22

accelerates the development of more effective visits, and facilitates experimentation and

evidence gathering, merits further exploration.

5600 words

References

British Council (2018) Next Generation Kenya, Report [Online]. Available at:

https://www.britishcouncil.co.ke/programmes/society/next-generation-kenya (Accessed 15

August 2019)

British Council (2019) Accelerate home, [Online]. Available at:

https://www.britishcouncil.org.au/programmes/arts/accelerate (Accessed 10th October

2019)

Carty, H.S. (2017) ‘ACCELERATE 2009 - 2016 Impact Assessment and Evaluation Report’,

May, [Online]. Available at:

https://www.britishcouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/accelerate_impact_report.pdf

(Accessed 10th October 2019)

Conole, G. (2013) Designing for Learning in an Open World, New York: Springer-Verlag

Cramp, A. (2016) ‘Enhancing school leadership through an international study visit’,

Professional Development in Education, Vol 42 No 5, pp. 787-800,

Cross, S., Galley, R., Brasher, A., and Weller, M. (2012) Final project report of the OULDI-JISC

project: Challenge and change in curriculum design process, Communities, Visualisation and

23

Practice, York: JISC [Online]. Available at: http://www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/wp-

content/uploads/2010/11/OULDI_Final_Report_Final.pdf (Accessed 15th August 2019)

Daiwa Foundation (2019) ‘About us’, [Online]. Available at: http://dajf.org.uk/about

(Accessed 9th October 2019)

De Beukelaer, C. (2016) 'Toward an "African" take on the cultural and creative industries?',

Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 582–591

De Gruyter, J., Achten, M., Op De Beeck, I. & Van Petegem, W. (2011) ‘Virtual Mobility:

Definition and Types’, in M. Achten, I. Op De Beeck, & W. Van Petegem, (eds.) (2011) Home

& Away Forum. Conference Proceedings. Leuven: EuroPACE ivzw, pp. 17 - 36 [Online].

Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/34563398.pdf (Accessed 11th October 2019)

ECA (n.d.) ‘The Fulbright Program’, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of

State, [Online]. Available at: https://eca.state.gov/fulbright (Accessed 18th October 2019)

The Economist (2019) 'A higher challenge', The Economist, Vol. 432, Iss. 9155, Aug 10, pp. 38-39.

European Council (2017) 'Celebrating 30 years of the Erasmus Programme', Library Blog,

15 June [Online]. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents-

publications/library/library-blog/posts/celebrating-30-years-of-the-erasmus-programme/

(Accessed 18th October 2019)

Fallon, G. and Paquette, J. (2015) 'Rethinking Conceptions of First Nations Educational

Leadership and Ethics', Chapter 13 in Burgess, D. and Newton, P. (eds.) Educational

Administration and Leadership: Theoretical Foundations, Abingdon, Routledge Academic

Research, pp.218 – 239

24

Flecknoe, M. and O’Sullivan, C. (1997) ‘Transitions: The Experience of Professionals Studying

in another Country’, University Council for Educational Administration, Orlando Florida, 1

November.

Gastinger, A. (2011) ‘Innovation Through Internationalisation -- Barriers for going abroad

and actions to overcome them’ (poster), August, [Online]. Available at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237065721_Innovation_Through_Internationalis

ation_Barriers_for_going_abroad_and_actions_to_overcome_them_poster (Accessed 15

August 2019)

GBSN (n.d.) ‘About’, Global Business School Network, [Online]. Available at:

https://gbsn.org/about/ (Accessed 15th October 2019)

Maranzan, K. , Sabourin, A. , Simard-Chicago, C. (2013) ‘A Community-Based Leadership

Development Program for First Nations Women: Revaluing and Honoring Women’s

Strengths’, The International Indigenous Policy Journal, Vol. 4, No. 2. Available at:

http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/iipj/vol4/iss2/5 (Accessed 15 August 2019)

Martin, F. and Griffiths, H. (2012) ‘Power and representation: a postcolonial reading of

global partnerships and teacher development through North–South study visits’, British

Educational Research Journal, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp. 907–927

McInnes, A., Goss, J.M., Fisher, H., Brockman, R. (2019) 'Learning from others: A critical

reflection on an international study programme', International Social Work, Vol. 62, No. 1,

pp. 337–350.

Open University (2016a) ‘Learning to teach: becoming a reflective practitioner ’, OpenLearn

course [Online]. Available at:

25

www.open.edu/openlearn/education/learning-teach-becoming-reflective-

practitioner/content-section-0 (Accessed 15th October 2019)

Open University (2016b) ‘Planning a Project’, OpenLearn course [Online]. Available at:

www.open.edu/openlearn/money-management/management/business-studies/planning-

project/content-section-0 (Accessed 15th October 2019)

O’Sullivan, C. (2018) ‘Leading and managing the marketing function’, Chapter 10 in Hill, L.,

O’Sullivan, C., O’Sullivan, T., and Whitehead, B. (2018) Creative Arts Marketing (3rd edition),

Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 255 – 286.

O’Sullivan, C. and Flecknoe, M. (2000) ‘An Evaluation of Continuing Professional

Development for Overseas Students visiting the UK: Should we take CPD to them instead?’,

International Studies in Educational Administration, Vol 28, No 1, pp. 28 - 47

O'Sullivan, T. and O'Sullivan, C. (2018) ‘Creative Arts Marketing Third Edition: Using Cases

and Content Face to Face and Online’, in Johansson, T. ed., (2018) Beyond EYCH2018. What

is the cultural horizon? Opening up perspectives to face ongoing transformations, A

compilation of papers presented in the framework of the 9th Annual ENCATC Education and

Research Session and published by ENCATC , ENCATC (European network on cultural

management and policy), Brussels, pp. 195–208.

Peters, M. A. (2012) 'Neoliberalism, Education and the Crisis of Western Capitalism', Policy

Futures in Education, Vol 10 No 2, pp. 134 – 141

Raelin, Joseph A., (2002) 'I Don't Have Time to Think!' (vs. The Art of Reflective Practice) ’

Reflections, Vol 4, No. 1, Fall 2002, pp. 66-79.

26

Rientes, B. and Toetenel, L. (2016) 'The impact of learning design on student behavior,

satisfaction and performance: A cross-institutional comparison across 151 modules',

Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 333 - 341

Catherine O’Sullivan – personal biographyDr. Catherine O’Sullivan works at Leeds University, supportingthe formation of young professionals; and at York University inemployability. She was Chief Executive of the Thames ValleyHealth and Innovation Cluster, from 2010-2015. Previously,Cathy was the Chief Operating Officer of the School ofCommunity and Health Sciences, City University London, withresponsibility for the smooth running of all the School’spresent and future business.

Cathy came to the University from the National Health Servicewhere she was a commissioner of education and learning inthe West Midlands.

Cathy is currently researching business networking activity and is very keen to talk toother conference delegates about this subject from an African perspective.